Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Figures and Tables
- List of Acronyms
- Notes on Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction: Marketisation and Privatisation in Criminal Justice: an Overview
- Part I Introduction and Theoretical Frameworks
- Part II Experiences of Marketisation in the Public Sector
- Part III Marketisation and the Voluntary Sector
- Part IV Beyond Institutions: Marketisation Beyond the Criminal Justice Institution
- Conclusion: What Has Been Learned
- Index
16 - Misery As Business: How Immigration Detention Became a Cash Cow in Britain’s Borders
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 March 2021
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Figures and Tables
- List of Acronyms
- Notes on Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction: Marketisation and Privatisation in Criminal Justice: an Overview
- Part I Introduction and Theoretical Frameworks
- Part II Experiences of Marketisation in the Public Sector
- Part III Marketisation and the Voluntary Sector
- Part IV Beyond Institutions: Marketisation Beyond the Criminal Justice Institution
- Conclusion: What Has Been Learned
- Index
Summary
Introduction
In the UK's electoral cycles since 2010, there has been growing support for political parties projecting nationalism, nativism and exclusionism, which implicitly constructs foreigners (or at least, economically vulnerable foreigners) as a threat and promises a sharp cut in immigration numbers. This was arguably the backbone to the Conservative Party's electoral success and also to the 2016 Brexit vote. Although already long in existence, the then Conservative government leader Theresa May coined the term ‘hostile environment’ with respect to foreign migrants in 2012, leading to a radical overhaul of legislative and administrative provisions, introducing even harsher, punitive and restrictive immigration policies, rapidly drawing and expanding crime control structures into the immigration arena, creating aggressive technologies of control and outsourcing of provisions for migrants generally, and people seeking asylum specifically. Consequently, this resulted in further mistreatment of migrant groups and dramatic rights violations. Through the Windrush exposé in 2018, the wrongful and unlawful nature of the immigration control regime was made visible (again), and on this occasion led to significant public outcry. The environment experienced by wealthy or foreign nationals living in the UK, it hardly needs to be said, is rather more sympathetic.
A short history of the outsourcing of detention
In 1971, having relied on immigration to meet skill shortfalls in the aftermath of the Second World War, the British government decided to halt the ‘flow’ of non-white migration from the former colonies into the UK. Having contributed significantly to Britain's economic rebuilding, the increase in family resettlement and now unneeded additional labour led to invested interests closing borders which had previously been open. Alongside this was the implementation of a series of restrictive measures which has since included virginity testing, x-ray screening of minors and the increased imprisonment of illegalised, mostly non-white migrants.
It was during the 1970s that the Conservative government of the day contracted Securicor – which later merged with Group 4 Falck, now G4S – to manage detention facilities, one in Harmondsworth near Heathrow airport, and a second one near Manchester airport. In 1971, Securicor Group Limited and Security Services Limited were also listed on the London Stock Exchange. Ten years later, in 1981, Securicor Chair Peter Smith was awarded the OBE for services to the security industry.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Marketisation and Privatisation in Criminal Justice , pp. 257 - 272Publisher: Bristol University PressPrint publication year: 2020
- 1
- Cited by